Dhannalaldkahad vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2024 Latest Caselaw 28121 MP

Madhya Pradesh High Court

Dhannalaldkahad vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 4 October, 2024

Author: Anand Pathak

Bench: Anand Pathak

         NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2024:MPHC-GWL:17627




                                                                1                                MCRC-39198-2024
                             IN     THE       HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                                    AT GWALIOR
                                                        BEFORE
                                          HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE ANAND PATHAK
                                                  ON THE 4 th OF OCTOBER, 2024
                                           MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 39198 of 2024
                                                   DHANNALALDKAHAD
                                                          Versus
                                              THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH
                          Appearance:
                             Shri Siddharth Sijoria - Advocate for the petitioner.
                             Smt. Anjaly Gyanani - Public Prosecutor for the respondent/State.

                                                                    ORDER

1 . This is third application under Section 482 of BNSS filed by the applicant seeking anticipatory bail in relation to Crime No.50/2017, registered at Police Station Jamner, District Guna (Madhya Pradesh) for the offences punishable under Sections 365, 342, 323, 34 of the IPC.

2. It is the submission of the learned counsel for the applicant that the maximum punishment which can be awarded under the provisions as contained into complaint is 7 years, that too offence under Section 365 of

IPC, therefore, case is triable by the Magistrate. Police filed closure report but Trial Court taken cognizance. Once cognizance has been taken then the applicant is entitled to appear before the Trial Court as per law and the judgment rendered by the Apex Court in the case of Arnesh Kumar Vs. State of Bihar, (2014) 8 SCC 273 and Satendra Kumar Antil Vs. CBI, 2021 SCC Online SC 922.

3 . Learned Public Prosecutor for the State opposed the prayer and

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2024:MPHC-GWL:17627

2 MCRC-39198-2024 submitted that twice bail applications have been rejected and no change circumstances exists at present, therefore, anticipatory bail application may be dismissed.

4. Heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents appended thereof.

5 . In view of the above submission advanced by the learned counsel for the State, it appears that earlier two bail applications filed on behalf of the applicant, one vide order dated 17.05.2021 passed in MCRC No.22837/2021 and second vide order dated 14.10.2022 passed in MCRC No.48150/2022 have been dismissed. As such, no changed circumstances exist at present, therefore, no case for grant of anticipatory bail is made out. However; since

maximum punishment which can be given in case is 7 years, therefore, applicant is at liberty to appear before the Trial Court raising all the grounds including judgments rendered by the Apex Court in the cases of Arnesh Kumar (Supra) and Satendra Kumar Antil (Supra), which shall be considered by the Trial Court as per law.

6. Accordingly, the present anticipatory bail application stands rejected with aforesaid liberty.

(ANAND PATHAK) JUDGE

Rashid

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2024:MPHC-GWL:17627

3 MCRC-39198-2024